(no subject)

[skygiants]

For the past approximately 15 years, I've been attempting to write a novel about Sir Kay, the Orkney knights, and weird Arthurian family dynamics. It's one of those things that I pick up about my extent draft of approximately every five years, think "huh! maybe with some extensive revision," get halfway through the extensive revision, realize I still haven't figured out how to do it, and put it down again. Maybe someday! With extensive revision!

Anyway it was probably about five years ago that I realized that someone had already written this book, sort of, and since then I've been hunting in bookstores for used copies of Phyllis Ann Karr's Idylls of the Queen, which I have now finally acquired and read.

This was a weird reading experience in the way that it always is when reading a book that's almost the book you would have written. About half the things that she's doing are very specific things that I am also really interested in, and it's deeply mysterious to me I arrived at them completely independently when she was already there three years before I was born. And then there are things that I never in a million years would have done, like making Sir Kay desperately in hopeless love with Queen Guinevere. What? I mean, OK, sure, but I wouldn't have ever gotten there. There must be a word for this, that weird feeling of almost-mine-but-not-quite.

Anyway, the thing that Karr does that I think is most interesting -- that I would like to do and probably will never do half so well -- is the way that she looks very closely at Arthurian stories from Malory and various lays and legends and hews very much to the letter of What Happens In Them, while also sort of shaking them inside out and looking at how that might have looked to the various different humans involved (often, especially, the women). It's really clever and a lot of fun, while also being about as disturbing as anything that takes much of Malory and various other early Arthuriana literally would have to be.

The actual plot of the book involves Queen Guinevere being accused of murder, and Sir Kay and Mordred going on a DETECTIVE SPREE ends up getting tangled up not just in Guinevere's alleged crime, but also all the weird backstory Orkney blood feud stuff of who murdered whom in revenge against whom. Eventually there's a Locked Room Denouement in full Poirot style, but first there is the TWO MOST ANNOYING KNIGHTS IN THE WORLD on a ROAD TRIP, hanging out with various Arthurian side characters like Nimue and Morgan and Sir Pelleas and Sir Ironsides and irritating the heck out of all of them, and it is honestly amazing.

KAY: I'm traveling with Mordred because he's the worst, and because he's definitely a suspect for the murder.
SOME RANDOM NORMAL ROUND TABLE PERSON: Sir Kay, why are you traveling with Mordred? He's the worst! Aren't you worried that his bad reputation will rub off on you?
KAY: Um, excuse me? I was given to understand that I was the rudest and most annoying knight of the Round Table? I'm pretty sure you should be worried that my bad reputation is going to rub off on this poor, innocent child, so why don't you lay off??

[later]

Mordred: I am totally ready to be murdered by ANYONE, probably YOU, probably TONIGHT. Here I am, LANGUISHING IN MY BEDROOM, WEAPONLESS -
KAY: CHILD! why are you such a DRAMA LLAMA

[later]

MORDRED: Now, hypothetically considering the possibility that maybe Guinevere did want to murder someone -
KAY: I'll fight anyone who accuses the queen! I'll fight you anytime, anywhere! How very dare you imply that it's even REMOTELY POSSIBLE that the Queen might have been in ANY WAY responsible for -
MORDRED: lololol look who is the drama llama! PS are you ready to murder me yet?
KAY: CHILD!!!!!

(To be clear, Mordred is like in his thirties in this book.)

[KAY AND MORDRED ARE ARGUING AGAIN]
KAY: Suddenly, I feel like shit! Why is this!
NIMUE: That's because I cast a spell of magical depression on you to get you to briefly -- oh, so blissfully briefly -- stop talking.
KAY: Mordred is the one who was ruder, why didn't you cast it on him?
NIMUE: You're the one who told me that Mordred was very emotionally fragile and I should be careful of his tender ego!
KAY: ...ugh, so I did. Ugh, and I meant it. Fine.

Basically what I'm saying is that it's still remotely possible that someday I will get my version into shape for other human eyes to see, but despite the strangeness of the experience, I'm not mad that Karr did it first.

Comments

[sovay]

About half the things that she's doing are very specific things that I am also really interested in, and it's deeply mysterious to me I arrived at them completely independently when she was already there three years before I was born.

This became a feature of my life as soon as I really started paying attention to weird fiction and folk horror and I have no idea what gives, except that clearly those are the genres a person writes in if they have very particular feelings about hauntings and time.

Basically what I'm saying is that it's still remotely possible that someday I will get my version into shape for other human eyes to see, but despite the strangeness of the experience, I'm not mad that Karr did it first.

I am glad. I love this book deeply, but it has always felt to me like a very mileage-may-vary endeavor.

[skygiants]

I've had the experience before of reading something and going "I wish I'd written that" or "I see what you're doing and here's the road we both took," but this is definitely the weirdest path and I cannot remember the directions at all.

It is a very particular book and I do wonder how it would read to anyone who's not already pretty deep into Arthuriana, enough to recognize the in-jokes and the flips in the stories -- like, even I didn't recognize them all, I never did get all the way through Malory. And it's (probably deliberately) unsatisfying in a number of ways -- I was going to say, 'maybe especially if you don't know what happens,' but actually it's equally unsatisfying if you do, really, just unsatisfying in a different way. I dreamed an extra chapter last night and was really disappointed to wake up and find out the dream was wrong. But I admire it a lot, for how unflinching it is, and how willing to face the weirdest and worst of Arthurian myths and put real people inside them.

[sovay]

And it's (probably deliberately) unsatisfying in a number of ways -- I was going to say, 'maybe especially if you don't know what happens,' but actually it's equally unsatisfying if you do, really, just unsatisfying in a different way.

I did not find it unsatisfying, but I suppose I could have missed something.

I dreamed an extra chapter last night and was really disappointed to wake up and find out the dream was wrong.

What did you dream?

But I admire it a lot, for how unflinching it is, and how willing to face the weirdest and worst of Arthurian myths and put real people inside them.

Yes. It's a really interesting kind of retelling from the outside in—instead of reinterpreting events, coming up with characterizations that could plausibly behave in the necessary ways—and I think it works.

[skygiants]

I find it narratively unsatisfying in that the central tensions don't resolve, just progress on ominously. The rifts between the Orkneys widen; Mordred's more torn up inside than before; Lancelot and Guinevere go on in the same way they always have done. The resolution of the mysteries provides catharsis, sure, but a very deliberately un-cathartic one.

I'm pretty sure the extra chapter was a conversation between Mordred and Kay, although what I really wanted the whole book, honestly, was a good conversation between Kay and Artus. That's a sibling relationship I'm way more interested in than Karr seems to be.

[sovay]

the central tensions don't resolve, just progress on ominously. The rifts between the Orkneys widen; Mordred's more torn up inside than before; Lancelot and Guinevere go on in the same way they always have done.

Understood. I don't find that unsatisfying because unless the novel was going to extend to encompass the Götterdammerung phase of the Matter of Britain, there's nothing else they could do.

although what I really wanted the whole book, honestly, was a good conversation between Kay and Artus. That's a sibling relationship I'm way more interested in than Karr seems to be.

It might have eaten the book if she'd gone for it. Maybe someone will request it for Yuletide.

[cahn]

I... really want to know what your dream was. Though I think I need to go back and read the book again first (what did I do with my copy?? grr)

[skygiants]

I think it was an extra Mordred chapter, from somewhere slightly earlier in the book than the very end, but placed at the end for mysterious dream logic reasons.

[thistleingrey]

(Is it weird that I have been waiting for memory to fade so that I'm not THAT deeply into Arthuriana before trying to read Idylls?)

I dreamed an extra chapter last night

That's pretty awesome, actually.

[skygiants]

(Not weird, but I'm curious about why! I found myself wishing I'd read it in 2005 when I was still fresh off all my Arthuriana binging.)

[thistleingrey]

(um. I've read a bunch of contemporary and modern versions ...as well as some early modern ones and many of the western European medieval ones, all the way up to the earliest instances in text of each major recurring character (Latin, French, Welsh), together with some of the relevant secondary work. I've also taught an Arthurian survey (in guise of composition class), twice, which meant deciding what to include/exclude for non-literature majors. That is not how most contemporary writers expect a reader to approach their work! and though it gives me a fine appreciation for the few contemporary texts that make something interesting of a well-trodden garden of forking paths, it has made me rather picky because I can't not see the superset of what may be possible.)

[kore]

....one thing you've done here is made me want Kay/Mordred fic for this book and I am REALLY not sure how I feel about that

[sovay]

....one thing you've done here is made me want Kay/Mordred fic for this book and I am REALLY not sure how I feel about that

Eh, I'd read it.

[skygiants]

I can totally see it (and I'm like 80% sure that's the goal of whoever nominated it for Yuletide). But I think I'm more invested in it as yet another weird Arthurian family relationship, in which Kay is really not a very good uncle but he's kind of sort of trying!

[sovay]

But I think I'm more invested in it as yet another weird Arthurian family relationship, in which Kay is really not a very good uncle but he's kind of sort of trying!

I think one of the reasons I'd believe it is the inevitable tendency of Arthurian family relationships to collapse toward incest, but since I hadn't realized the book was nominated for Yuletide, I will read pretty much whatever anyone writes for it, although Karr's style is going to be hard to pastiche.

[skygiants]

IT DOESN'T ALWAYS HAVE TO END IN INCEST

(nominated characters include Kay, Mordred, Lynnette, Guinevere, and Lancelot-not-appearing-in-this-book, which indicates that at least two people nominated it. An interesting set, too.)

[kore]

Ohhh it got nominated hunh? hmmm.

[kore]

-- Wait, now I know why that author's name but not the title was familiar, she wrote a continuation of Lady Susan (I collected Austen continuations back in the Dark Ages ((70s and 80s)) before people were writing shit like Death Comes To Pemberley Again: The Reckoning).

[skygiants]

Was it any good??

[kore]

I wish I could tell you, I think I read it in 1988. It must have been pretty good because the "hey I heard of that author" association was vaguely pleasant?

[sovay]

It must have been pretty good because the "hey I heard of that author" association was vaguely pleasant?

Outside of Idylls, I know her best for Frostflower and Thorn (1980) and Frostflower and Windbourne (1982), a pair of secondary-world fantasies wth female protagonists and some fascinating gender worldbuilding, including the only consistent attempt I have seen in English (rather than Latin) to differentiate sexual vocabulary based on who's perceived as the active partner. I suspect for most people the sexual violence quotient in these books is high, but I enjoyed both of them; she has a knack for writing protagonists who are my favorite characters, which is not usually how that goes.

[edit] So I went looking to see what else Phyllis Ann Karr had written and the answer appears to include Savoyard space opera and genderswapped Sheriff of Nottingham, so I'm going out on a limb here to say that "Arthurian murder mystery" is not actually the weirdest thing in her bibliography.

[edit edit] Whoever claims that "much of her later work has been more conventional than her earlier efforts" has clearly not been looking at Google Books.

[skygiants]

These look ... delightful?? I am clearly going to have to keep hunting for Karr in used bookstores. I did bring back another book by her from the same used bookstore where I found Idylls of the Queen - this one, which does not SEEM as weird, but appearances can clearly be deceiving.

[sovay]

this one, which does not SEEM as weird, but appearances can clearly be deceiving.

That's the novel about her short story series character! I have not read it. Please report back!

[graycardinal]

Um. D'Ammassa is usually reliable, but he made a major error here. The trouble is that the Phyllis Ann Karr who wrote Idylls of the Queen and the Frostflower books is NOT the Phyllis Ann Karr who debuted in fantasy with The Glass Dragon. The latter is an entirely different Phyllis Ann Karr who published as "Irene Radford" specifically to avoid confusion with the earlier writer. Ironically enough, the latter of the two has (a) since changed her legal name to Radford (because even some of the publishers were getting confused) and has also published under a good half dozen other pen names since, as the current state of commercial publishing is such that you can't break out of midlist sales numbers with a midlist track record.

Bottom line: Anything published under the Karr byline is by the original Karr. Anything attributed to Radford, or to a Radford pen name, is not. (I think the Clute/Nicholls Encyclopedia of Fantasy has the two Karrs properly distinguished, but I don't have it at hand to look.)

[sovay]

The trouble is that the Phyllis Ann Karr who wrote Idylls of the Queen and the Frostflower books is NOT the Phyllis Ann Karr who debuted in fantasy with The Glass Dragon.

Thank you for the clarification! Also, yikes.

[thistleingrey]

Oh, eek. I didn't know that. I think Radford is this Irene Radford, specifically--one of the early members of the BVC cooperative.

[vass]

There must be a word for this, that weird feeling of almost-mine-but-not-quite.

*nodnod* I know one other person in the Imperial Radch fandom who has the same fanfic ideas I do. Not always, but not just once or twice either. The same details, sometimes, not just characters and tropes. It's spooky.

I guess it seems less spooky when two different people independently come up with "Steve/Tony coffeeshop AU" or "Clint Barton/Phil Coulson fake dating, pining" because we're giving more weight to belonging to book fandoms being statistically rare, and less to how two people in the same book fandom are selecting for an obsessive interest in the same things. Or something.

[skygiants]

lol, yeah, I am usually not surprised when two people come up with the same coffeeshop AU! But some ideas do feel memetic, I think, and you sort of know as you're thinking of them that someone else has probably had this idea - or that someone else would have it if a critical mass of people were familiar enough with the source material to do so. And then others feel so personal and particular, big fandom or little fandom, that it's weird when someone else comes up with them, no matter what!

[cyphomandra]

Ooh. I read this as a teenager when my group of friends was on an Arthurian kick, and liked it, but haven’t retained much other than feeling it was orthogonal to a lot of the others. Must seek it (and her others, judging by comments ) out again!

[skygiants]

It's definitely a really interesting, sideways version and has shot up to among my favorite Arthuriana very quickly!

[littlerhymes]

...this book sounds amazing. I would watch the Kay & Mordred road trip reality tv show.

I hope you write your version too!

[sylleptic]

Oooh, I should reread that. It's one my three canonical* Arthurian adaptations, but I haven't reread it much because of the "about as disturbing as anything that takes much of Malory and various other early Arthuriana literally would have to be" aspect.

I would love to read your version!

*I realize "canonical" makes zero sense here, because all three completely contradict each other. I just can't think of a concise way to say "the ones that feel right to me and shaped my interpretations."

[sheliak]

Hi! I have been lurking around for a while and figured I ought to say hello.

I read this book a while ago, and enjoyed it a lot—Kay and the Orkneys are some of my favorites, so of course I did. There were several episodes that I didn't recognize (or knew only from the Squires Tales version, which does take a lot of the details of the early versions but tends to skew them drastically), but overall I'd absorbed enough for it to make sense.

I read her Robin Hood book The Gallows in the Greenwood at about the same time. I didn't like it quite as much, but I thought it was interesting, and it made me wish I knew more about the source material—rather like this book, it's set not so much in historical England but in the world of the old Robin Hood ballads. It also did some interesting things with combining and separating existing characters—the protagonist is an amalgam of at least three different people, and there are a pair of siblings who are one person (but spelled differently) in the ballads. I thought it was clever, but I would probably have gotten more out of it if I had known more than a couple of the original songs.